[RFC,05/23] hurd: Disable Prefer_MAP_32BIT_EXEC on non-x86_64 for now

Message ID 20240103171502.1358371-6-bugaevc@gmail.com
State Committed
Commit 6afeac1289b92bc893613cc9efc9b5c692369e64
Series aarch64-gnu port |


Context Check Description
redhat-pt-bot/TryBot-apply_patch success Patch applied to master at the time it was sent
linaro-tcwg-bot/tcwg_glibc_build--master-arm fail Patch failed to apply

Commit Message

Sergey Bugaev Jan. 3, 2024, 5:14 p.m. UTC
  While we could support it on any architecture, the tunable is currently
only defined on x86_64.

Signed-off-by: Sergey Bugaev <bugaevc@gmail.com>

Alternatively, we could declare the tunable for all Hurd ports (e.g. in
sysdeps/mach/hurd/dl-tunables.list), but I'm concerned about whether it
would interact well with the existing definition for x86_64. Is it
considered OK for the same tunable to be declared in two places?

 sysdeps/mach/hurd/dl-sysdep.c | 2 +-
 sysdeps/mach/hurd/mmap.c      | 2 +-
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)


diff --git a/sysdeps/mach/hurd/dl-sysdep.c b/sysdeps/mach/hurd/dl-sysdep.c
index 43129a1e..6ba00e41 100644
--- a/sysdeps/mach/hurd/dl-sysdep.c
+++ b/sysdeps/mach/hurd/dl-sysdep.c
@@ -457,7 +457,7 @@  __mmap (void *addr, size_t len, int prot, int flags, int fd, off_t offset)
   if (prot & PROT_EXEC)
     vmprot |= VM_PROT_EXECUTE;
-#ifdef __LP64__
+#ifdef __x86_64__
   if ((addr == NULL) && (prot & PROT_EXEC)
       && HAS_ARCH_FEATURE (Prefer_MAP_32BIT_EXEC))
     flags |= MAP_32BIT;
diff --git a/sysdeps/mach/hurd/mmap.c b/sysdeps/mach/hurd/mmap.c
index 7b945610..30e369f0 100644
--- a/sysdeps/mach/hurd/mmap.c
+++ b/sysdeps/mach/hurd/mmap.c
@@ -60,7 +60,7 @@  __mmap (void *addr, size_t len, int prot, int flags, int fd, off_t offset)
   copy = ! (flags & MAP_SHARED);
   anywhere = ! (flags & MAP_FIXED);
-#ifdef __LP64__
+#ifdef __x86_64__
   if ((addr == NULL) && (prot & PROT_EXEC)
       && HAS_ARCH_FEATURE (Prefer_MAP_32BIT_EXEC))
     flags |= MAP_32BIT;